Hypolocomotion, Asymmetrically Directed Behaviors (Licking, Lifting, Flinching, and Shaking) and Dynamic Weight Bearing (Gait) Changes are Not Measures of Neuropathic Pain in Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spontaneous (non-evoked) pain is a major clinical symptom of neuropathic syndromes, one that is understudied in basic pain research for practical reasons and because of a lack of consensus over precisely which behaviors reflect spontaneous pain in laboratory animals. It is commonly asserted that rodents experiencing pain in a hind limb exhibit hypolocomotion and decreased rearing, engage in both reflexive and organized limb directed behaviors, and avoid supporting their body weight on the affected side. Furthermore, it is assumed that the extent of these positive or negative behaviors can be used as a dependent measure of spontaneous chronic pain severity in such animals. In the present study, we tested these assumptions via blinded, systematic observation of digital video of mice with nerve injuries (chronic constriction or spared nerve injury), and automated assessment of locomotor behavior using photocell detection and dynamic weight bearing (i.e., gait) using the CatWalk system. RESULTS: We found no deficits in locomotor activity or rearing associated with neuropathic injury. The frequency of asymmetric (ipsilaterally directed) behaviors were too rare to be seriously considered as representing spontaneous pain, and in any case did not statistically exceed what was blindly observed on the contralateral hind paw and in control (sham operated and unoperated) mice. Changes in dynamic weight bearing, on the other hand, were robust and ipsilateral after spared nerve injury (but not chronic constriction injury). However, we observed timing, pharmacological, and genetic dissociation of mechanical allodynia and gait alterations. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that spontaneous neuropathic pain in mice cannot be assessed using any of these measures, and thus caution is warranted in making such assertions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".